We have already discussed most of the so-called ten major disciples of Shakyamuni, but there remain three about whom something should be said: Purna, Katyayana, and Subhuti.
Purna was praised as being “foremost in preaching the Law.” Unrivaled in the eloquence with which he could expound the doctrine, he came from a rather different background from most of Shakyamuni’s other major disciples. Neither a Brahman nor a son of the aristocracy, he belonged, like Sudatta, to the class of wealthy merchants and is said to have amassed a huge fortune through commerce and trade.
Purna was not a native of central India, where Shakyamuni’s preaching activities were concentrated, but came from a seaport town in western India that was situated north of the modern city of Mumbai and hence was far removed from the circle of Buddhist influence of the time.
One may wonder how a man engaged in commercial enterprise and living in an area so remote from Buddhist activity could possibly have become a disciple of Shakyamuni. It came about, we are told, in the following way. Purna was apparently well known among merchants and traders, and his fame had reached even as far as Shravasti, the capital of Kosala. A group of Shravasti merchants, having heard of his reputation, appeared at his home on the seacoast and asked if he would join them in a commercial voyage, thinking no doubt that with the benefit of Purna’s experience they could turn a large profit. Purna readily consented and the party set out.
As it happened, the Shravasti merchants were all lay converts to Buddhism, and during the voyage they regularly gathered in a group to perform their devotions. We do not know exactly what form such devotions took at that time, though presumably they involved some sort of repeated recitation of Shakyamuni’s teachings. Purna, his curiosity aroused, asked what they were doing, and they told him about Shakyamuni and his teachings. Purna was deeply moved and, when the voyage was over, immediately set off for Shravasti, where he heard the Buddha preach and determined to become a member of the Order.
One cannot help wondering whether Purna’s rather unusual background had something to do with his widely recognized skill in preaching the Law. His long and at times no doubt trying experiences as a merchant had probably taught him a great deal about human nature, and, like any good businessman, he had learned to read the minds of the people with whom he dealt. In later years, when he turned to the preaching of the Law, he utilized these abilities, skillfully adjusting his delivery to the capacity of his audience and presenting the teachings of Buddhism in such a fashion that they would make the greatest possible impression upon his listeners. He was a forceful leader, who, having grown up with the common people and made his living among them, knew well how to reach them with the Buddha’s message.
Katyayana, also known as Mahakatyayana, was a native of Ujjayini, the capital of the state of Avanti. A Brahman by birth, he held a position as religious adviser and confidential secretary to the ruler of that state. Though there is no indication that Shakyamuni himself ever visited Avanti, situated in the western part of central India, it is mentioned frequently in the sutras and other Buddhist writings, probably as a result of Katyayana’s activities. He was the first native of Avanti to become a disciple of the Buddha and was considered “foremost in debate.”
Like Purna, he was converted at Shravasti, where he had been sent by the ruler of Avanti, who had heard reports of Shakyamuni’s teachings. At the Jetavana Monastery, he had occasion to listen to Shakyamuni preaching the Law and was so moved that he instantly determined to become a member of the Order. Shakyamuni then sent him back to Avanti, where he succeeded in converting the king and many others to the new faith. He seems to have been a skilled theoretician who was especially adept at categorizing and systematizing the various pronouncements of the Buddha and presenting them in lucid and trenchant form.
The last of the great disciples to be discussed, Subhuti, seems by comparison with the other members of the group to be singularly lacking in color and individuality. It might fairly be said that he is characterized principally by his lack of characteristics. There are almost no anecdotes connected with his name, and one is puzzled to understand how he happened to be numbered among the ten major disciples. In later centuries he was regarded as having been “foremost in understanding the doctrine of non-substantiality” (shunyata), though I wonder if this is accurate. In the Wisdom sutras, which deal with this doctrine, he is addressed by the Buddha as the one who has grasped the doctrine of non-substantiality most clearly. And yet, in contrast with men like Shariputra and Maudgalyayana, he was hardly a conspicuous figure in the Order, which one would guess he should have been if he was really “foremost in understanding the doctrine of non-substantiality.”
To explain this apparent discrepancy, the well-known Buddhist scholar Fumio Masutani suggests that Subhuti was distinguished not for any profound understanding of metaphysical doctrine but rather for his balanced and well-rounded personality. He was a nephew of Sudatta, the wealthy philanthropist who donated the Jetavana Monastery to Shakyamuni and his followers, but in spite of this connection, his role in the activities of the Order appears to have been an unassuming one. Perhaps, surrounded by men of greater intellectual brilliance and force of character, the tolerant and mild-mannered Subhuti served as a kind of shock absorber within the Order. Shakyamuni may deliberately have held up this gentle and modest man as a model for the other members of the Order, hoping that his example would have a beneficial influence.
Although we have only legends and scattered anecdotes upon which to base a judgment, when examining the accounts pertaining to these ten great disciples of Shakyamuni, we cannot help being struck by the disparate nature of their personalities, the diversity of their talents and resources, and the remarkable way in which Shakyamuni succeeded in making use of these.
People tend naturally to gravitate toward those whose personalities please them or who possess abilities and traits similar to their own. But no one who even unconsciously reveals such partiality can be called a leader in the true sense. The true leader is one who can skillfully draw out and develop the potential of all types of people, even those who differ radically from or are uncongenial to oneself, and utilize them in creating a well-balanced and harmonious whole. Shakyamuni was an outstanding example of such a leader, principally, I would suggest, because his method of developing the varied resources of the people under him was based on an overall understanding of human nature in all its manifold aspects.
Purna, Katyayana, and Subhuti were all converted by Shakyamuni in the city of Shravasti, though only Subhuti was a native of the city, the other two having come from far away to listen to Shakyamuni’s sermons. This suggests the important role that the city itself played as a center of Buddhist activities.
Chinese translations of the scriptures speak of “the three hundred thousand of Shravasti,” though whether this is to be taken as an accurate count of the population of Kosala’s capital is a matter of debate. It is said that one-third of Shravasti’s population attended Shakyamuni’s sermons, one-third heard his teachings though they never saw him, and one-third neither saw nor heard of him. This suggests that well over half the population of the city was either converted to or favorably disposed toward Buddhism, and this supposition is borne out by other sources. From this, we can surmise the great impact that the work of the Buddhist Order must have had upon the city.
Why, one may ask, was Buddhism so widely known and accepted in Shravasti? Shakyamuni and his followers at first centered their activities on the city of Rajagriha in Magadha, and only extended them to Shravasti, some distance to the north, at a much later period. According to one theory, the rapid growth of Buddhism in Shravasti was initially due in large part to the efforts of the rich merchant Sudatta, who returned to the city after having been converted in Rajagriha. As the first Buddhist believer in the city, he laid the foundation upon which the faith would later flourish and spread. We have seen, for example, that he bought a plot of land from the crown prince of the state and constructed the Jetavana Monastery, providing a place where the members of the Order could spend the rainy season.
There is a clear demarcation between the dry season and the rainy season in India, and it is common practice to calculate time in terms of so many rainy seasons rather than so many years. After Sudatta had built the Jetavana Monastery for them, Shakyamuni and his followers customarily spent the rainy season there, studying and meditating. In later years, this monsoon retreat in Shravasti became a headquarters for Shakyamuni’s preaching activities. But, as the sources attest, there were to be many frustrations and setbacks before Buddhism could become the dominant religion in Shravasti. Shakyamuni encountered numerous attacks and persecutions during his lifetime, the best known being the so-called nine great ordeals. These include a the treacherous plot on the part of Devadatta as well as hostile acts directed at the Order during its early days in Shravasti.
Various reasons have been suggested as to why Shakyamuni was subjected to such persecutions, but there is no doubt that it had to do with the religious situation in Kosala at the time. Both Kosala and Magadha had suddenly risen to political prominence shortly before Shakyamuni’s time. To their capitals came the leaders of new Brahmanic sects, such as the six non-Buddhist teachers who resided in Rajagriha, as well as various wandering ascetics. The religious scene was dominated by the ferment of their new ideas and theories. At the same time, traditional Brahmans continued to be highly respected at the courts of the rulers of these states, though their activities were conventionalized and pertained mainly to matters of ritual. Under such circumstances, it is not surprising that Shakyamuni met with opposition from these various groups in his efforts to propagate the Law.
Though Shakyamuni and his disciples had the Jetavana Monastery to use as a base for their activities, the atmosphere that surrounded them was by no means entirely friendly. On the contrary, the Brahmans resorted to all manner of devices to discredit Shakyamuni and his teachings. One plot involved a courtesan named Chincha, who pretended to be pregnant and claimed that Shakyamuni was the father.
In another incident, the Brahmans, after spreading rumors linking Shakyamuni with a courtesan named Sundari, had the woman killed and put out the rumor that her death was the work of the Buddhist monks. To such lengths were the Brahmans willing to go in an effort to maintain their power and position and to combat what they regarded as a threat to their status. However, Shakyamuni was able to endure and overcome such obstacles, conquering them through the power of truth and reason and opening the way for the spread of the Law.
Every revolution has its counterrevolution, and any new humanistic religion is bound to face almost inhuman attack from the established powers of society. The teachers of the new religion, however, must push ahead, confident in their future and prepared to persevere in the face of criticism and slander. The accounts of the Buddhist activities in Shravasti, where, eventually, a majority of the inhabitants were converted, show that its widespread propagation was due to the courageous efforts of Shakyamuni and his disciples.
The scriptures record another anecdote that illustrates the kind of opposition and animosity that the new religion faced from older religious groups. This concerns the confrontation between Shakyamuni and a Brahman living in Shravasti who worshipped the fire god Agni and was known to be extremely dogmatic in matters pertaining to caste. When he saw Shakyamuni begging for alms, he immediately called him a “base, lowly monk,” as he was accustomed to do whenever he met any non-Brahman mendicant. Shakyamuni replied to his words of abuse by saying, “No Brahman is such by birth; no outcaste is such by birth. An outcaste is such by his deeds; a Brahman is such by his deeds.”
This reply, I think, sums up very well the Buddhist attitude toward the caste and class system. “An outcaste is such by his deeds; a Brahman is such by his deeds”—in other words, a person’s true worth is determined not by an accident of birth but by the kind of life that person leads. This statement demonstrates that a very pragmatic ethic, with a strikingly modern tone, was being preached some twenty-five hundred years ago. It also indicates clearly that, according to Buddhism, an individual’s way of life takes precedence over any hierarchical distinctions that may be imposed by the social system of the time.
Some scholars, noting that Shakyamuni rejected the distinctions laid down by the caste system, ask why he did not go a step further and actively work to overthrow the system. They find it somehow condemnable that he was not more thoroughgoing in his repudiation of caste and class. But such criticisms fail to take into account the true nature of Shakyamuni’s mission. He was not, after all, a social agitator or reformer but the founder of a new religion, whose chief concern was the spreading of the Law. He sought to look beyond the facade of social structure and organization to observe the basic ills that beset humankind and to devise some effective means by which to free people from their sufferings. With this end in view, he set forth a universal system of truths and ethical values, a system that transcended the society and age in which he lived.
The system, or perhaps one should say the way of life, that he taught denied the validity of the class and caste distinctions that prevailed in Indian society at that time, but this does not necessarily mean that Shakyamuni himself was obligated to carry out a program of social reform. He concentrated on defining the basic principles and premises according to which people should live and left it to his adherents to consider whether these principles could be reconciled with the existing social order or necessitated some kind of social reform.
Too often, it seems to me, we try to understand the individual strictly in terms of the society and period that produced him rather than the other way around. Thus, with Shakyamuni, we ask about his attitude toward the social institutions and ills of his time and, on the basis of the answers we arrive at, attempt to surmise what sort of person he was. In the case of Shakyamuni, and in a broader sense of all great religious leaders, such an approach is inappropriate. Shakyamuni and men like him are primarily concerned not with social institutions but with more basic problems of human existence and human worth. Only when we consider them in the light of their responses to these basic questions can we evaluate them correctly.
It is well to remember that Shakyamuni not only openly expressed his disapproval of the traditional distinctions of class and caste but also enforced a strictly egalitarian approach within the religious Order that he founded. As demonstrated earlier, he completely disregarded questions of race, caste, or class in the organization and daily functioning of the Buddhist Order. Regardless of whether a monk had been born as a Brahman, a Kshatriya, a Vaishya, or a Shudra, all members were on equal footing. Thus, although Shakyamuni did not attempt to carry out any sweeping social reform that would do away with the class and caste system entirely, he founded within the society of his time an organization that rejected all class and caste distinctions, certainly an act that can be viewed as a step in the direction of eventual social reform.
Returning to the subject of Buddhist activities in the city of Shravasti, we should note that, in addition to the Jetavana Monastery, there was another Buddhist establishment on the outskirts of the city. This was the Mrigara-matri Hall, which was situated to the east of the Jetavana Monastery. The hall was donated to the Order by a woman adherent of the faith named Vishakha. The daughter of a wealthy man of the state of Anga, she became a fervent believer in Buddhism at an early age. Later, she married a rich merchant of Shravasti. On the occasion of her wedding, the groom invited five hundred naked Brahman ascetics to help solemnize the proceedings, but she raised strong objections and had them sent away. She then began to tell the groom and his parents about the teachings of Shakyamuni and converted the entire family.
It must have been quite unheard of in those days for a bride marrying into a family whose religious faith differed from her own to speak out so boldly, and what is more, to succeed in winning over all her in-laws to her own persuasion. Evidently she was a woman of forceful character and certainly a model of the proselytizing spirit.
Her husband’s family, whose surname was Mrigara, was profoundly impressed by her religious zeal and addressed her as Matri, or Mother, because of her seniority in the faith. Thus she came to be known as Mrigara-matri even among the ordinary citizens of Shravasti, by whom she was admired and respected.
In time, with the help of such zealous supporters as Sudatta and Mrigara-matri, the Buddhist Order overcame the opposition and hostility that it initially faced and spread its teachings among the citizens of Shravasti. An event that had great bearing upon this process, and which gives us much to think about even today, was the conversion of King Prasenajit, the ruler of Kosala. He seems to have been converted to Buddhism relatively early and became a devoted patron of the faith after observing the extraordinary respect and reverence with which Shakyamuni was treated by the common people of his state.
In ancient India, heads of state and Brahman priests were customarily accorded the highest degree of respect. And yet, as King Prasenajit observed with his own eyes, Shakyamuni was capable of inspiring within his followers a love and respect far transcending that paid to any worldly monarch. In the end, the king found himself moved to the same kind of reverence for the Buddha and his teachings. This is one more proof that the Law is capable of stirring people’s innermost hearts in a way that mere wealth and temporal authority never can.
There are numerous other accounts of Shakyamuni’s proselytizing activities in Shravasti, which is hardly surprising in view of the fact that so many of the inhabitants are said to have been won over to Buddhism. Among the most colorful tales is one that deals with the conversion of the notorious brigand Angulimala. In Chinese translations of the scriptures, he is often referred to as “Necklace of Fingers,” a curious name and one that derives from the fact that he wore an ornamental necklace made of the severed fingers of people he had murdered.
A Brahman by birth and formerly a student of Brahmanic learning, he is said to have been tricked and betrayed by his teacher and his teacher’s wife and thereafter to have turned to a life of evil, causing widespread terror among the people of the time. The scriptures give a highly dramatic account of how Shakyamuni, determined to save the young man, went out to meet him. The young man attempted to attack Shakyamuni, but the latter fended him off with various magical powers and in the end converted him.
The story of Angulimala is no doubt intended to illustrate that even the most evil and vicious of people can be saved through the great compassion of the Buddha. It also indicates that true religion does not merely bring solace to the spirit but is a vital, active force that does not hesitate to plunge into the midst of the dangers and sordidness of the world to rescue people of all types from suffering.
With its main base of operations at the Jetavana Monastery in Shravasti, the Buddhist Order appears to have spread over a very wide area of India. Various sources indicate that, in addition to Shravasti and Rajagriha, Buddhism was well established in Shaketa, Varanasi, Vaishali, Kaushambi, and Ujjayini, all situated along the middle reaches of the Ganges River. From this it may be inferred that Shakyamuni and his disciples proselytized mainly in central India, teaching in towns and villages along the caravan routes.
In the cities mentioned above, the citizens lent their support to Buddhism, though not perhaps as enthusiastically as the inhabitants of Shravasti, and donated monasteries. These latter include the Sapta-parna-guha, or Cave of the Seven Leaves, in Rajagriha, where the First Buddhist Council was later held; the Great Forest Monastery near Vaishali; and the Deer Park Monastery at Varanasi. From this we can surmise that these cities acted as centers for the propagation of Buddhism in central India.
As converts and itinerant monks increased in number and more centers of Buddhist activity opened, it became necessary to establish rules and precepts for the governing of the Order.
In his later years, Shakyamuni, while continuing to preach the Law, is said to have given much thought to the administrative problems involved in the running of the Buddhist Order. At first the Order consisted simply of a community of monks. Later the assembly of nuns was established and two more groups, those of male and female lay believers, were added. Thus the Order came to be made up of four assemblies: bhikkhus (monks), bhikkhunis (nuns), upasakas (laymen), and upasikas (laywomen).
It is not certain just what rules and precepts Shakyamuni devised for the running of the Order. Scriptural sources list 250 precepts for the monks and 500 precepts for the nuns, but these were apparently compiled at a later date. It is doubtful that such complicated rules of discipline existed during Shakyamuni’s lifetime, although undoubtedly there were detailed rules for the ordination of monks and nuns and the other rituals of the Order.
We know, for instance, that all members of the Order were enjoined to pay the highest respect to the three treasures, namely the Buddha, the Law, and the Buddhist Order, while in religious practice emphasis was placed upon meditation and the cultivation of prajna, or wisdom, as well as on the keeping of the precepts.
For the lay believers, the five precepts were set forth. These commanded the believer to refrain from taking life, taking what is not given, committing adultery, telling lies, and drinking intoxicants. But these precepts appear to be more in the nature of ethical standards that the believers were expected to observe than a form of religious practice. The basic religious practice of the believer, we can surmise, was conceived to be the contemplation of the Law, the cultivation of wisdom, and the reform and improvement of the individual.
Judging from Shakyamuni’s teachings and what we know of his manner of preaching, his approach seems to have been rather lenient and tolerant. It is therefore difficult to believe that he devised the 250 precepts for monks and 500 precepts for nuns that are found in the scriptures. These minute and sometimes rigorous rules were more probably drawn up after his entry into nirvana, perhaps because members of the Order felt that only in this way could proper discipline be maintained. Unfortunately, they have led some to the mistaken view that Buddhism is severe in its demands upon its followers. Shakyamuni himself appears to have been a man of very few wants and desires, but in preaching to others he did not force them to practice strict asceticism or denial of all desires. On the contrary, he taught his followers to lead a life of moderation, avoiding both hedonism and extreme self-denial. The Middle Way, as we have seen, is a basic doctrine of Buddhism, and though the monk or nun was undoubtedly expected to follow a more austere way of life than the lay believer, neither monk nor layman was expected to depart from this central ideal of moderation.
In the early days of Shakyamuni’s preaching career, as we have mentioned above, no women were allowed in the Order. Though they requested admittance in increasing numbers, Shakyamuni is said to have refused their requests, and it was only in his later years that, through the efforts of Ananda, he was persuaded to change his mind. The first female member of the Order was Mahaprajapati, Shakyamu-ni’s aunt, who from his infancy acted as a mother to him.
Given that throughout his life Shakyamuni taught the equality of all human beings and repudiated the conventional distinctions of caste and class, one wonders why he took such an apparently biased view of women and for so long excluded them from the Order. This is a difficult question and one that no doubt requires further study by scholars before it can be properly answered. My own feeling, however, is that he did not despise women or look down on them. Nowhere in his teachings do we find any general statement on women or any indication that they are to be classed apart from men.
It is interesting to note the pronouncements that Shakyamuni is recorded to have made concerning the duties of a husband and wife. He remarks that a wife should manage the household competently, treat her husband’s friends and acquaintances with respect, take care of the property, and be chaste and diligent. But he also states that it is the duty of a husband to be courteous and faithful to his wife, to give her due authority in managing household affairs, and to buy her clothes and adornments.
Far from suggesting that Shakyamuni had any basic prejudice against women, this would seem to be a very understanding and enlightened view of a woman’s role in the marriage relationship, or at least one that would have seemed remarkably enlightened for the times. One should keep in mind that, in ancient India, the position of women was generally very low. Even in prosperous households, women were treated as little better than slaves once they had finished bearing children. And if they failed to produce any male heirs, their husbands could divorce them with ease. In a society that constantly emphasized the superiority of men over women, Shakyamuni’s attitude was decidedly progressive.
Nevertheless, when it came to questions of the admittance and position of women in the Order, Shakyamuni’s response was surprisingly strict. Perhaps he wanted to protect his disciples from distraction and make certain that there would be no disruption in the daily discipline and religious practice. He was anxious that his followers, once they had become monks, should reach the same high level of enlightenment that he himself had attained, but he knew that this required great effort and concentration. The monks had renounced secular life and set out upon the path toward higher understanding. For this reason, they had to be sheltered from any influence that might frustrate their efforts and deflect them from their course. It was with concerns of this kind, I believe, that Shakyamuni hesitated for so long to admit women to the Order.
In Buddhist literature, one frequently finds women alluded to as “animality incarnate” or “the cause of five obstacles,” but such phrases, hyperbolic though they may be, are probably intended simply as a device to warn monks away from any unseemly involvement with women.
We know from the Indian literature of the time that women were customarily looked upon as lustful and quarrelsome by nature. Eventually, in the scriptures of the Mahayana schools of Buddhism, especially the Lotus Sutra, we find it clearly stated that women are capable of attaining Buddhahood. This doctrine, in my opinion, has its roots in the teachings of Shakyamuni himself, who stressed the equality of all human beings as the fundamental truth of his teachings. The fact that, at Ananda’s urging, he welcomed women into the Order clearly attests to this.
With the admission of Mahaprajapati, the Order came to consist of both monks and nuns, and the number of nuns increased considerably in Shakyamuni’s later years. Among the most notable were Khema, the consort of King Bimbisara, who was regarded as “foremost in wisdom” among the nuns; Utpalavarna, the daughter of a Shravasti merchant; and Dammadina, who was regarded as “foremost in preaching.”
In the course of the growth and development of the Order, a very serious event occurred. This was the revolt of Devadatta, which caused the Buddha considerable anxiety in his closing years.
Devadatta was among the nobles of the Shakya tribe who were converted when Shakyamuni visited Kapilavastu. A cousin of Shakyamuni and a brother of the famous disciple Ananda, Devadatta converted when he was still in his twenties and was thus about thirty years younger than Shakyamuni. Far from being a troublemaker, he was instrumental, along with the other young nobles of the Shakya clan, in instilling vigor into the Order.
The first indications of his treachery came to light immediately after a visit made to the region of Kaushambi to the west. Shakyamuni seems to have made a number of journeys to Kaushambi, but this particular one took place about thirty years after his enlightenment. At this time, Devadatta, who had previously been guileless and single-minded in his religious practice, became consumed by thoughts of wealth and fame. Such ambitions have often corrupted the minds of those with an otherwise devout disposition, and Devadatta, in spite of his earlier sincerity, proved to be no exception. Filled with dreams of winning the leadership of the Order away from Shakyamuni, he began by approaching Ajatashatru, the son of King Bimbisara of Magadha.
Devadatta knew that Prince Ajatashatru was jealous of the prestige his father enjoyed and disgruntled because his father would not relinquish the throne to him, and Devadatta skillfully played upon the prince’s discontent and frustration until he had worked his way into the young man’s confidence. The prince in turn presented various gifts to Devadatta, which aroused the envy of the other members of the Order. Shakyamuni thereupon admonished his disciples for their pettiness. Reminding them that the passion for fame and wealth ran counter to the Buddhist spirit, he predicted that the prince’s gifts and honors would eventually be the ruin of Devadatta.
Shakyamuni had by this time no doubt seen through Devadatta’s ambitions. At first merely envious of the universal adulation that Shakyamuni enjoyed from the people around him, Devadatta had become increasingly jealous of the Buddha and convinced that he himself should take over the leadership of the Order. He even went so far as to ask Shakyamuni in the presence of the other disciples to retire and place the Buddhist Order in his charge. Shakyamuni reproached him stiffly, saying that this was out of the question; he would not entrust the leadership of the Order even to such outstanding disciples as Shariputra and Maudgalyayana, much less to a person like Devadatta. This was a great blow to the pride of the ambitious Devadatta. He was especially hurt because Shakyamuni had told him that Shariputra and Maudgalyayana were like “blazing torches,” whereas his own mediocre intelligence shed “even less light than a night lamp.” Having thus failed to acquire the position he coveted, he seems to have lost all sense of reason and human decency and began to hatch schemes to do away with Shakyamuni.
First, Devadatta goaded Prince Ajatashatru into rebelling against his father, who was a patron and faithful follower of Shakyamuni. Convinced that his father’s longevity would bar him from the throne forever, the prince had the old king imprisoned and starved to death, taking his place as ruler of Magadha. According to a different version of the tale, the king discovered the conspiracy beforehand but, seeing how anxious his son was to reign, voluntarily relinquished the throne to him. In any event, through Devadatta’s machinations, Ajatashatru became the king of Magadha and Devadatta’s enthusiastic patron and supporter.
Devadatta’s next step was to plot an attack on Shakyamuni. He persuaded the king to hire assassins to kill Shakyamuni, but when the assassins saw the Buddha, they fell at his feet in worship. Devadatta grew bolder and, choosing a time when Shakyamuni was at Mount Gridhrakuta (also known as Vulture or Eagle Peak), hurled a rock at him from the mountaintop. Only a fragment of the rock struck Shakyamuni, injuring him slightly in the foot, but the incident is significant as the first attempt made by Devadatta in person to take the Buddha’s life.
Another legend relates that Devadatta loosed a mad elephant in the street where Shakyamuni was begging alms, but the elephant, like the hired assassins, was awestruck and humbled by the Buddha’s presence and did him no harm.
Devadatta’s gravest offense, however, is said to have been his attempt to sow dissension in the Order, which up until this time had enjoyed great harmony and unity of purpose. Devadatta advocated monastic rules even stricter than those upheld by Shakyamuni and so tried to make himself appear superior to the Buddha. There are some discrepancies depending upon the source, but the precepts Devadatta advocated are more or less as follows: (1) Practitioners should dwell in the woods away from villages or towns; those who enter villages or towns are committing an offense. (2) Practitioners should live on alms alone; those who accept invitations to banquets are committing an offense. (3) Practitioners should dress in rags; those who accept donated robes are committing an offense. (4) Practitioners should dwell under trees and not under a roof; those who go near a roofed abode are committing an offense. (5) Practitioners should not eat the flesh of animals or fish; those who break this precept are committing an offense
The fact that Devadatta could come forward with these proposals is ample indication that, as we have said above, the Buddhist Order did not practice or condone extreme austerities or forms of discipline. Specifically, the first proposal was intended as an indirect criticism of the Order for using the Jetavana Monastery, the Bamboo Grove Monastery, and similar establishments as headquarters and retreats during the rainy season, while the second expressed disapproval of the considerable donations that were often presented to the Order by wealthy and influential believers as Shakyamuni’s fame spread among the populace.
As the proposals indicate, Devadatta, his earlier schemes having failed, was attempting to create dissension within the Order by pretending to be in favor of far greater austerities than had been practiced heretofore and by urging the monks and nuns to support his suggestions.
Devadatta’s was a very clever plot. As Devadatta had foreseen, Shakyamuni would not countenance the enforcement of such strict rules and abruptly dismissed the proposals. Devadatta, feigning outrage, then called upon the other members of the Order to support him. Attracted to the principles of purity and austerity that he upheld, we are told, about five hundred recently ordained members left the Order and followed Devadatta to Mount Gayashirsha. This was the first schism to occur in the history of the Buddhist Order.
The moral of this episode would seem to be that ambitious men, by proclaiming high-sounding principles and appearing to be purer in faith than those around them, are capable of deceiving and leading others astray. It points up more than ever the truism that one cannot judge a man on the basis of his words alone. It is unfortunate that in the history of humankind, appeals for greater purity and fidelity to higher principles should so often be employed by hypocritical people as tools to mislead others and advance their own schemes.
By cleverly exploiting people’s psychological weaknesses, Devadatta brought about a temporary schism within the Order. Shakyamuni, however, dispatched his most trusted disciples, Shariputra and Maudgalyayana, to preach to the dissidents, and the five hundred monks, seeing through Devadatta’s pretensions, soon returned to the fold. According to legend, when Devadatta learned of this, he was so enraged that he coughed up blood and died not long afterward.
Because of the enormity of his deeds and the fact that in the end he failed so completely, the subject of Devadatta’s revolt is treated at length in the Buddhist scriptures. In the “Devadatta” chapter of the Lotus Sutra, however, Shakyamuni foretells salvation and enlightenment for the reprobate, setting forth the doctrine that even the most evil of people can attain Buddhahood.
In the Lotus Sutra, Devadatta the historical personage is used to typify what is in fact a universal tendency within human beings. The ambition and the passion for honor and wealth that drove Devadatta to his acts of evil lurk in our own minds as well, an inherent part of human nature. Blinded by ambition, we too are in danger of losing self-control and a proper perspective. We may even attempt to satisfy our desires through deceit or evildoing. At the same time the Lotus Sutra teaches us that we too are certain to achieve Buddhahood if we can learn to contemplate and understand our own natures and devote ourselves wholeheartedly to the highest objectives.
The problem before us is how to keep in check the Devadatta who inhabits the deep recesses of our mind and instead awaken the Buddhahood inherent in us. This is the most essential point in Buddhist practice, and it is through the process of striving to solve this problem that we develop true strength of character. For this reason, the Devadatta episode is of great significance to us today, offering an opportunity to think deeply about our own faith and manner of life.
As for Devadatta’s royal patron King Ajatashatru, he is said to have fallen gravely ill as a result of the evil deeds that he committed. He repented and became a devout Buddhist. After Shakyamuni’s death, he continued to work diligently for the propagation of the faith. He is well known in later times for his part in helping to collect and put in order the Buddhist scriptures.